From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Hardy Subject: Re: Question: array locking, possible? Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 10:16:20 -0800 Message-ID: <43E8E3F4.1050409@h3c.com> References: <20060207185517.7bc96486@mwdsp001.swissptt.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20060207185517.7bc96486@mwdsp001.swissptt.ch> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Chris Osicki wrote: > > To rephrase my question, is there any way to make it visible to the > other host that the array is up an running on the this host? > > Any comments, ideas? Would that not imply an "unlock" command before you could run the array on the other host? Would that not then break the automatic fail-over you want, as no machine that died or hung would issue the unlock command, meaning that the fail-over node could not then use the disks It's an interesting idea, I just can't think of a way to make it work unattended It might be possible wrap the 'mdadm' binary with a script that "checks" (maybe via some deep check using ssh to execute remote commands, or just a ping) the hosts status and just prints a little table of host status that can only be avoided by passing a special --yes-i-know flag to the wrapper -Mike